Do you still support Trump? - The Kosher Le'pesach edition

[ExGingi]

The yeshivish take: Someone just needs to ask a godol if this is the proper hishtadlus.
Oh, wait...

I thought of responding to @zh cohen above mentioning metaphysics, but opted for what seemed easier to explain.

[mevinyavin]

I thought of responding to @zh cohen above mentioning metaphysics, but opted for what seemed easier to explain.

The thread was indeed begging to have this brought in. I refrained until I realized that my quote from Levitt had this as the only counterpoint, so I said so.

[AsherO]

Levitt’s point of comparing the Swiss mail voting to hypothetical internet voting might be apples to oranges. How much interaction with mail did people from small villages have, vs. the proliferation of internet in this country. Also, how difficult/costly was it for them to incrementally add another letter to their mail vs. someone active on the internet clicking a button in an internet poll?

[mevinyavin]

Levitt’s point of comparing the Swiss mail voting to hypothetical internet voting might be apples to oranges. How much interaction with mail did people from small villages have, vs. the proliferation of internet in this country. Also, how difficult/costly was it for them to incrementally add another letter to their mail vs. someone active on the internet clicking a button in an internet poll?

That was someone else's study, actually, which he quoted. The point relevant to us was that there seems to be no point in voting. I agree with you regarding this comparison - it does seem a bit of a stretch. Maybe it seemed more relevant when it was written, but in today's environment, it seems very off.

[AsherO]

As for the value of votes in NY or California:

If voter turnout in those states dropped precipitously then a bigger percentage of eligible voters would be swing voters and those states would be swing states.

This doesn’t address current turnout, but proliferating a mindset that your-vote-doesn’t-count-so-don’t-bother-going-to-vote could lower those turnout numbers significantly, and IINM potentially turn such a state into a swing state.

[AsherO]

That was someone else's study, actually, which he quoted. The point relevant to us was that there seems to be no point in voting. I agree with you regarding this comparison - it does seem a bit of a stretch. Maybe it seemed more relevant when it was written, but in today's environment, it seems very off.

tbh it was too long and I didn’t read to the bottom lol

[CountValentine]

That was someone else's study, actually, which he quoted. The point relevant to us was that there seems to be no point in voting.

If we don't vote how do we decide who runs everything? 

[CountValentine]

This doesn’t address current turnout, but proliferating a mindset that your-vote-doesn’t-count-so-don’t-bother-going-to-vote could lower those turnout numbers significantly, and IINM potentially turn such a state into a swing state.

Wouldn't the opposite be more probable? Less turnout would be from the loser, no? That would make the state less of a swing vote.

I guess this would be based on if someone is more likely to turn out for a winner than a loser.

[AsherO]

If we don't vote how do we decide who runs everything? 

I don’t think it’s a pretzel to say that while the current voting system implements the democratic imperative for “the voice of the people” being heard, in some elections my voice would be so drowned out due to the extreme partisan disparity in my state and whether I’m voting red or blue nothing would change if I made the personal choice to stay home.

[AsherO]

Wouldn't the opposite be more probable? Less turnout would be from the loser, no? That would make the state less of a swing vote.

I guess this would be based on if someone is more likely to turn out for a winner than a loser.

Let’s take an extreme example for illustration:

Let’s say 10 people turn out to vote in all of NY state, 7 blue and 3 red. Then a single swing voter that votes red has a significant impact on the elections.

[CountValentine]

Let’s take an extreme example for illustration:

Let’s say 10 people turn out to vote in all of NY state, 7 blue and 3 red. Then a single swing voter that votes red has a significant impact on the elections.

Can this also happen?

The three red decide next time they have to chance so decide to sit out. Now it is 7-0 so a self-fulling prophecy.

[CountValentine]

I don’t think it’s a pretzel to say that while the current voting system implements the democratic imperative for “the voice of the people” being heard, in some elections my voice would be so drowned out due to the extreme partisan disparity in my state and whether I’m voting red or blue nothing would change if I made the personal choice to stay home.

I look at it as the partisan votes cancel each other out so that makes my vote/voice even more important.

[AsherO]

Can this also happen?

The three red decide next time they have to chance so decide to sit out. Now it is 7-0 so a self-fulling prophecy.

No because my presumption is that the majority and minority voters have equal reason to believe they don’t matter because of the position of the party they vote for.

“My party will win anyway” vs. “my party will lose anyway” is equally compelling to me.

[CountValentine]

No because my presumption is that the majority and minority voters have equal reason to believe they don’t matter because of the position of the party they vote for.

“My party will win anyway” vs. “my party will lose anyway” is equally compelling to me.

Fair enough and that is where I disagree. When I hear my vote doesn't count it is usually if not always from the loser.
People love winning. 

[AsherO]

People love winning. 

Sounds like a feeble minded swing voter whom you don’t need to convince to vote for a specific candidate based on their merits. They’ll vote for whomever is leading in the polls and all you have to do is have the polling advantage and convince them to come out and vote and you have their vote in your pocket.

I’d say these aren’t as common as you’re suggesting.

[ExGingi]

Fair enough and that is where I disagree. When I hear my vote doesn't count it is usually if not always from the loser.
People love winning. 

I have been consistent, regardless of who wins.

[CountValentine]

I have been consistent, regardless of who wins.

Wasn't directed at you.

[gozalim]

In elections where the average quantity of "I" voters (the count's favorite kind) approaches the average margin of victory, is a 'swing state' and the individual vote counts in the sense that, in aggregate (though not individually), the choice to vote affects the outcome.

Where I voters are considerably below the margin of victory, there are 2 steps needed before the individual vote matters, even in agregate

[ExGingi]

As for the value of votes in NY or California:

If voter turnout in those states dropped precipitously then a bigger percentage of eligible voters would be swing voters and those states would be swing states.

This doesn’t address current turnout, but proliferating a mindset that your-vote-doesn’t-count-so-don’t-bother-going-to-vote could lower those turnout numbers significantly, and IINM potentially turn such a state into a swing state.

Which is why voter ID laws and voter suppression is of utmost importance.